&bullet; Wear it around town.
&bullet; Wear it when you drink alcohol.
&bullet; Wear it when you get your son or daughter at the police station.
&bullet; Wear it when the court orders you to attend a MADD Victim Impact Panel fundraiser.
&bullet; Wear it into the liquor commissioners office and ask about signing up to do alcohol stings.

The more a citizen understands how wrong it is to drive drunk, the worse it is to be treated like a drunk driver, by hypocritical bigots who cannot even imagine anybody drinking and not driving.

Lets Try This Approach

Photo Credit #39 below

Admit it: You like the one in the shorts.

The debate is not about whether Mr. and Mrs. Twenty should be allowed to drink, as if it were by the indulgence of one class of citizens that another enjoys the exercise of their inherent natural rights. The question is, Should the government continue to violate the right of persons under 21 to drink? and the correct answer is no.

One step in the right direction would be to respect the rights of persons who demand to be exempted from the drinking age. These folks would have EXEMPT – NO MERCY marked on their identification, and would get no mercy if they drive drunk.

The psychology is this: Some people think that if they allow you to exercise your right to liberty, it is their fault if you drink too much and get a hangover, or grow addicted to alcohol. Let them feel good about providing this protection to people under 21 while exempting only those who demand to be exempted. Its not their fault if you drink too much after demanding to be exempted, after all. That is the way many voters will think. They figure theyre giving the pro-21 people their way (because the legal drinking age will still be 21, and plenty of people under 21 will not demand exemptions.) while also giving a choice to those who find the restriction totally unacceptable.

Lots of people prefer you not drink, but will stop short of forcing the drinking age on you, against your will, if it is totally unacceptable to you.

Supporters of the drinking age think their arguments are so persuasive, and the law is such a wonderful thing, that almost nobody would want to be exempted, so what would they have to lose?

One benefit for parents is that folks are less likely to buy for their child if the buyer knows the parents could have exempted the kid, and chose not to do so. (Children under 18 could only be exempted with their parents permission.)

Another argument in favor of opt-out is that those who would opt out are the ones who will drink, laws or no laws.

Strict libertarian principles would require an opt-in, but an opt-out will be available sooner.
Start now. START HERE

Help Spread The Message Of Liberty – Link To This Site

What To Say In CourtSee photo credit #41 below.

Your honor, I present copies of notarized letters I sent to the governor, and to the state senator and state representative elected where I live, reminding them that this blatantly unjust law is totally unacceptable to me and demanding its repeal, or a personal exemption from it. I note that I did not vote for them and it is not my fault they refuse to comply with my demand, and it is not my fault they got elected. The only reason I have to tolerate the injustice of this arrest is because I cannot fight off your government’s police forces. Short of building a time machine to bring myself to age 21, or giving up alcoholic drinks altogether, I did everything I possibly could to comply with this law. The state constitution specifies that all punishments be proportioned to the gravity of the offense. The so-called offense of exercising my God-given right to drink the beverage of my choice did not in any way violate anybody’s rights or put anybody in danger. Unlike some politicians, judges and cops, I know better than to get behind the wheel after I’ve been drinking. It stands to reason, therefore, that
the gravity of the offense was zero, and that is how much the fine ought to be.

Will you have copies of notarized letters to present if it happens to you?
Letters dated before the arrest? Print copies of the photo and include one with each letter.
START HERE.

NEW:Watch this excellent video clip, only 74 seconds, from
Bouncers Against Drunk Driving. While they are cozy with the hate-mongering MADD bigots, Bouncers does not promote bigotry and the use of unprovoked, state-sponsored violence to intimidate responsible citizens under 21 into giving up their right to drink altogether.

Attention Bouncers: Call a taxi, put it on their bill and dont serve them again until they pay up. Is there a way to make that work? Or a sign, Attention Patrons: If you see a drunk getting behind the wheel, please call the police to report them. If we overserved them we would rather get fined for that than get screwed royally if they crash. Besides...they might crash into somebody we like, or...they might crash into somebody you like.

Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) See photo credit #1, below. NEWS LINKRepublican Congressman Kevin Brady, busted for drunk driving on 7 October 2005, won re-election on 7 November 2006 by a 2-to-1 landslide, proving that most voters care about DWI only when it is a convenient excuse to violate the rights of people younger than 21.State Legislator Arrested for Drinking Under Age

The absurdity of the drinking age was made even more obvious on
30 October 2009 when a member of the New Hampshire Legislature was arrested for drinking under age.
Rep. Brian Poznanski, D-Nashua, was drinking at a party when police arrived to break up a
fight, then arrested all the underage drinkers. Poznanski was 20.
Since Poznanski did nothing to lower or repeal the drinking age,
its almost like its partly his own fault the Bedford Police arrested him.
Bedford Journal ... Cached

The Hon. Brian Poznanski

Help Spread The Message Of Liberty – Link To This Site

Brian Wilson, 17

Kills another outvoted discrimination victimThe criminal, now 28, drove drunk and killed a woman, age 20, in
November 2004. He was on probation when he was charged with driving drunk again, 7 June 2008, killing this guy.
Another teenager killed in a drunk driving crash for MADD to cite.

Tell lawmakers you wont serve
in the National Guard because lawmakers have no respect for your right to liberty.
CLICK HERE

Tell them you reject all their excuses, that this blatantly unjust law is totally unacceptable to you, and that you demand its repeal.

Get Involved Now

Contact your favorite radio station. The one you actually listen to.
Tell them you want them to play the
RADD PSAsRADD is against drunk driving but does not promote bigotry against people under 21.

Underagedrinkinglawsdontprotectpeopleunderage.

http://images.ibsys.com/2006/0321/8163573.jpg
Photo courtesy of Newsnet5.com. Used by permission.

Andrew Hopkins and Grace Chamberlain never got a chance to drink legally. They were both 18 when they were killed in a head-on crash on Route 700 in Burton Township, Ohio on 2 March 2006. Evan Dasilva, then 19, was critically injured, suffering fractures from head to leg, and permanently lost sight in one eye. All three attended Hiram College.
The suspect was 47 years old, had eleven prior DWI convictions on his record, fifteen suspensions against his license and 0.26% BAC by blood test.
Andrew and Grace didnt have to perish. The State of Ohio could have sent that criminal to prison for some serious time. They had eleven chances. They dont want to reduce drunk driving. Its easier for legislators to pretend theyve done something, by imposing the drinking age, than it is to impose serious drunk driving laws, which would apply to the lawmakers themselves.

In a free society, the governments job is simply to protect
liberty – the people do the rest. Lets not give up on a grand experiment that has provided so much for so
many. Lets reject the police state.
– 2002 Ron Paul 64:124

One of the most onerous practices of Congress is the use of federal funds illegitimately taken from the
American people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates.
– 1999 Ron Paul 1:3

Stephanie Currie, 16

Jordan Michalak, 16

Erica Haudek, 15

Devon Spurlock, 19

The Latest Outrage

These four teenagers were on Gratiot Avenue near Masonic Boulevard in Roseville, Michigan on 16 March 2009 at 20:30 EDT, waiting at a red light, when allegedly, a drunk (0.20% BAC) driver, 47, in a full-sized van, spun out of control, struck a light pole and then struck them. All four teenagers were killed.

Tell the potholes at the Underage Drinking Enforcement Training Center just how much you appreciate everything they are doing to catch you and throw you in jail before you wind up with a hangover.udetc@udetc.org,gordon@pire.org,amoore@pire.org,vazquez@pire.org,davis@pire.org,bpatterson@pire.org,torske@pire.org,mjohns@pire.org

Get a load of this!

The victims were 20. The drunk driver who
hit them was 22. Lisa Dicksons dad joins MADD to promote prejudice against people
like his daughter, who never got a chance to drink legally. (According to
this hes a chapter
president.) Then he writes a letter urging the judge to cut the drunk drivers sentence,
because Mr. Dickson is with MADD and MADD does not care about drunk driving. Besides, the
killer did say hes sorry. All we were looking for was for him to
stand up and say, You know what? I screwed up.
CLICK HERE. Makes sense to him. I mean, the killer was driving drunk, 0.20% BAC and killed
two innocent people on 11 May 2002, but, I mean, at least he wasnt drinking under
age.VIEW LETTER IN .PDF

Phone that MADD Chapter at 1-850-983-6775 and listen to the recording.Think. MADD is making big bucks off drunk driving.

These high school students arrived late for their senior prom, but with quite a story to tell. They used a cell phone to report the limo driver, had her park mid-trip, and took the key. She got arrested for her third DWI. Of course, she is still free to buy all the booze she wants, but they can get arrested and hauled off to jail for having one can of beer. Is that fair? Who is more responsible?
WFTV-TV
Channel 9Photo courtesy of WFTV Channel 9 Used by permission.

Dont expect men and women under 21 to want to enlist in the National Guard when Congress and the state legislature show so much unprovoked hostility toward people that age, purely out of malice.
Dont expect much respect for a law imposed as a consequence of overt Congressional bribery. What do people under 21 get from federal highway construction grants? Burned.

See photo credit #7 below.

UDADD demands the repeal of underage drinking laws, which will save lives because it will force legislators to pass tougher drunk driving laws on themselves.
Underage responsible drinkers have a powerful incentive to demand punishment for drunk drivers: Underage responsible drinkers not only are being punished for drunk driving crimes they didnt commit, they are also the innocent victims of such crimes.
All of the punishment for drunk driving crimes should be borne by the drunk drivers.
ABOVE: See photo credit #2, below. BELOW: See photo credit #3, below.

See photo credit #25 below

A serious crackdown on drunk driving would save far more lives than the underage drinking laws, because the vast majority of drunk drivers are over 21.

More people walking home and more people under license suspension means more citizens complaining about laws and policies that favor motorists and penalize pedestrians. Powerful political interests want to avoid that.

See photo credit #18, below.

UDADD demands tougher drunk driving laws, which punish the criminals for their willful wrongdoing,
instead of punishing responsible drinkers for being under 21, which they cannot avoid. Drunk drivers would rather punish underage responsible drinkers. (I can drive better drunk than they can sober.) In Vermont, Governor Richard Snelling proved this in the 1980s. Twice, he vetoed bills to raise the drinking age from 18 to 21, telling the Vermont Legislature to crack down on drunk driving. Under mounting pressure to do something about the carnage on the roads, the Vermont Legislature passed a bill to raise the penalties for drunk driving, which Governor Snelling signed.

See photo credit #14 below

Outvoted discrimination victims: Dont think youre fighting back when you drink, as Rosa Parks fought back against discrimination when she refused to relinquish her seat. If you drink yourself to death, it doesnt hurt drunk drivers or enemies of liberty one bit. Stick around and campaign for liberty.
Start today. If its between 9:00 and 17:30 in Washington, D.C., call both U.S. Senators and the U.S. Representative elected where you live, through the Capitol Switchboard at 1-202-225-3121. Otherwise, CLICK HERE. Demand the repeal of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act.See photo credit #6, below.

Who really has a more legitimate right to govern what you eat and drink, you or some politicians you voted against?
The voters who elected those politicians have no right to regulate what you eat and drink, be it water, wine or turpentine.
As long as youre not stealing it, youre not violating anybodys rights.
Repealing underage drinking laws does not imply approval of drinking by people under 21, any more than freedom of the press implies government approval of every editorial in the newspaper.

Its not just the reverse psychology or forbidden fruit psychology impelling outvoted discrimination victims to drink more than most adults over 21. Its also the last call psychology. If you get a chance to drink at 13, you may not get another chance for a long time, so you take the opportunity, much as adults over 21 order up at last call.

See photo credit #15 below
Note that some kids will turn down coffee, which is available 24 hours a day at the convenience store, but wont pass up a rare opportunity to drink an alcoholic beverage. These people get in the habit of drinking every chance they get. Some drinkers don't break this habit as the opportunities happen more and more often as they get older. In some cases, this leads to serious alcoholism, caused by restrictions on the availability of a beverage in what was supposed to be a free country, with liberty and justice for all.

If they give up on trying to buy beer because their first two attempts fail, that means the enemy wins. Outvoted discrimination victims may feel obligated to go to great lengths before surrendering to the enemy.
UDADD demands the repeal of underage drinking laws so that people under 21 can learn to drink under parental supervision at first, and then they can drink in supervised places such as bars if they desire.

See photo credit #12 below.

See photo credit #26 below

Furthermore, if there are no underage drinking laws, classmates are more likely to report a drunk driving away from their graduation kegger, and that report can save lives, especially if the government punishes the drunk before the drunk does it again eleven more times and finally causes a fatal crash.

See photo credit #22 below

ExcuseRejected:Democracy

See photo credit #28 below

By faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether accounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to permanent and aggregate interests of the community. – The Federalist No. 10 (Hamilton)
The only authority the government has is authority delegated to it by the people, which in turn is limited to the authority of those people, who have no authority to regulate what other people can drink.
The inherent natural rights of the citizen do not disappear with the manufacture of any document at the seat of government, no matter whether it is a statute, ruling, treaty or constitution.
Drunk driving is recklessly endangering innocent people, a violation of their rights.

See photo credit #30 below

The vast majority of voters have demonstrated their utterly total unwillingness to be vigilant guardians of the rights of people under 21. Theyre fired.

ExcuseRejected:NMDAInstead of bribing state legislators to impose second-class citizenship on innocent people under 21, why not bribe them to require ignition interlocks in all vehicles? This would practically eliminate all drunk driving, and the excuse for the drinking age.

They have no right to sell your freedom against your will.

Mothers Against Drunk Drivings website shows their sponsors include the American International Automobile Dealers Association, Arco, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, Nissan and Volkswagen.
CLICK HERE and HERE.

See photo credit #10, below

These sponsors want states to build more roads, and want to perpetuate laws and practices that reward driving and punish people without cars.

See photo credit #9, below.

It would not be in these sponsors best interest if drunk drivers lost their licenses for ten years for a first offense DWI, but it might be in yours.

See photo credit #17, below

Have they even bothered to do the math? The state would get more alcoholic beverage tax money, especially with out-of-state discrimination victims stocking up.
See photo credit #11 below.

See image credit #19, below

States should not surrender their authority for any price, let alone such a low price.

Not to imply that any level of government, other than individual self-government, has a right to impose a drinking age on an individual without his or her consent.

ExcuseRejected:BingeDrinking

Photo credit #37 below.

Binge drinking may lead to health problems, but not every drinker binges, and it is none of the governments business if they do. Its not like somebody else gets the hangover.

The government has no right to employ a police force as a weapon of unprovoked violence to intimidate people into living an alcohol-free lifestyle.

ExcuseRejected:FetalAlcoholSyndrome

See photo credit #34 below.

Why do they impose Prohibition on men under 21, and not on pregnant women 21 and older?

Its just easier to trample the rights of innocent persons
under 21, thats all.

The enemies of liberty ignore the obvious flaws in the absurd arguments they offer
to each other, and they figure everybody else should ignore those flaws, too.

ExcuseRejected:BloodBorders

What about the blood borders between wet and dry counties? These affect people 21+, far more people than the under 21 crowd tempted to make an interstate pilgrimage.
The drinking age was 18 in all of New England, New York and New Jersey. The drinking age was raised in states adjoining Vermont, and Vermont was criticized for the resulting inequality.

See photo credit #8

Bowie County, Texas is dry. Miller County, Arkansas is wet. The federal building straddles the blood border in downtown Texarkana. Texas side residents are tempted to drink in Arkansas and drive home.Photo courtesy of Texarkana Chamber of Commerce. Used by permission.

UDADD links to the following petition, not connected with UDADD: CLICK HERE

PHOTO CREDITSNote: Photographs are for illustration only. All quotes in voice balloons are created by this webmaster. Some politicians in these photos hold an office other than the one implied by the quotes in the voice balloons. On this site, DWI is used as a synonyn for drunk driving, even in cases where the local jurisdiction uses another acronym.

NEW! Angry e-mail from a hate-mongering MADD bigot.CLICK HERE
If theyre angry, I must be doing something right.